That's beautiful. My grandmother still tells me stories about how she went to the Grand theater a bit further down Rosedale in that area.

I imagine that some of the hype of Near Southside, especially by South Main, will start to spill over to the real Southside once real estate starts to really be in demand, so it's great to see Evans/Rosedale work now to establish the identity of the community so that future members can be a part of it instead of rewriting it. I would love to be a part of this community once it really starts to get going.

I imagine that some of the hype of Near Southside, especially by South Main, will start to spill over to the real Southside once real estate starts to really be in demand, so it's great to see Evans/Rosedale work now to establish the identity of the community so that future members can be a part of it instead of rewriting it. I would love to be a part of this community once it really starts to get going.

I hope so. My first home was near there. Grew up eating at Drake's after church.

It was the weak transition from the brick front to the siding that I was referring to. A single wythe of masonry shouldn't be viewed on end like that. Apart from appearances it also isn't the best condition for weatherproofing. That transition could have worked better wrapping the corner the length of just a couple bricks, incorporating the rowlocks on the front column would have been even better.

Or they could have just used siding all over, which I think actually would have looked better and higher-quality despite not being as "realtor fancy." Every time I see a house with just a front veneer of brick I think it looks cheaper/chintzier than if they'd just used siding on all sides.

Kevin, I tend to agree with you. I live in a 1929 house that has brick on all four sides, including the porches. The smaller front gable even has brick all the way up. The side gables do not. There is wood siding above the brick at those locations. My detached garage is entirely covered with wood siding.

I understand where you're coming from, but I don't think this design looks cheaper than a house completely covered in siding. That area is full of rundown, old homes completely covered in siding, as well as some newer ones that look just as bad as the old ones. I do think a mix of the two might have been a better option.

They may not be the best designs, but I feel like they stick out from the crowd, in a good way.

I think the problem with the examples of siding jsfslls mentioned is lack of maintenance (painting and/or washing). When I lived over on 6th avenue there were a lot of sharp looking houses with 100% siding, and some not so sharp.

Those two new houses aren't bad. I'm not too sure about the paint color choices though. Some of the details could have been executed a lot better too. The bond patterns on the brick on the second house are a little strange. The masons really didn't put much effort into their craft, and the designer made it hard on them as well. The goofy small brick pieces on the right side of the left column and on the right side of the entry look strange to me. Overall, they are good, and hopefully will spur more development.

I agree. I think it's too early in this redevelopment game to be very nit picky about veneers. These houses have new amenities and at least try to hearken back to the front-porch days most of us on this forum know and love. We need to pick our design battles at this stage in the game. Personally, I'm ecstatic that they are not standard garage in front suburban brick boxes, which very well could have been built there.

I believe city code requires the brick. Habitat for Humanity used to get away with not conforming to that for years (on the justification that homes with siding fit into the neighborhood better), but the city finally decided that even HFH homes needed the brick.